I wish the revelation of corruption would be sufficient to motivate voters to toss those responsible out of office.
But in practice it hasn’t.
The trend is using “messaging” and huge detailed databases to identify and motivate “low information” voters to outnumber those who pay more attention to the actions of public officials. There is big money behind this tactic, much of it from individuals and groups who stand to benefit from favorable governmental policy rulings and others who just get outright giveaways.
Onaka is the heart of the case. Indicting him and obtaining a confession as part of a plea agreement will establish Hawaii government fraud in Obama’s birth certificate and in so doing will demolish all defenses by Obama and his supporting press.
Onaka is already implicated by evidence of fraud by Arpaio’s investigators; it’s not a stretch to project a special prosecutor indicting him given enough political pressure by state courts.
As for general corruption, even deep blue union racket controlled Hawaii government can’t tolerate it when its stench becomes overwhelming. This is the reason democrats were thrown out more than 10 years ago in favor of Linda Lingle. So indeed ***there is evidence*** that corruption in government is sufficient to throw the corrupt out of office.